An interview with Steve Hays

[The following is a slightly edited portion of an email interview with Steve Hays conducted by Jesse Wisnewski on the topic of apologetics and blogging.]

From: Jesse Wisnewski
To: Steve Hays

Dear Steve,

If it's not too much to ask, can we begin with these first questions to then leverage them for future dialogue?

1. First off Steve, I would like to personally thank you for taking the time to conduct this interview with me. Before starting, why don't you share a little about yourself and how you came into blogging at Triablogue.

2. For those unfamiliar with the blog, could you briefly share its purpose and what your particular role is within it, and how you and team go about fulfilling its purpose.

Thanks again for your time!!!

Jesse Wisnewski

From: Steve Hays
To: Jesse Wisnewski

1. I'm a native of the Greater Seattle area. I'm a Calvinist. I became a Christian at the age of 16.

A graduate of Westminster in California, whom I knew back when I was John Frame's TA there, encouraged me to become a blogger.

2. Because blogging is an interactive medium, the agenda is, to some extent, set by what's out there. By what we need to respond to. Various challenges to the faith.

As a practical matter, there's a heavy emphasis on apologetics at Tblog. Defending Christianity in general and Calvinism in particular.

Different team members have different interests and priorities. Most of my blogging is consumed by apologetics, not because that's how I like to spend my time, but because there's a need for it.

In my spare time I also write Christian fiction.

Beyond apologetics, I also do some blogging on practical theology–as well as other odds and ends.

From: Jesse Wisnewski
To: Steve Hays

Dear Steve,

Thanks for your responses! Here are some more questions:

1. When you said, "Because blogging is an interactive medium, the agenda is, to some extent, set by what's out there." What in particular do you and the team members at Tblog look to respond to? Are there particular blogs and/or attacks against Christianity that take more precedence than others? Finally, are there particular trends that you have observed taking place that are of importance to address from an apologetic standpoint?

2. Before delving more into the apologetic realm, I found it i nter esting that you look to defend Calvinism in particular. What is it about Calvinism that you look to defend and why do you see this as an important issue?

3. Now, getting back to apologetics. What role do you see blogs playing in the field of apologetics? What would you consider to be the perceived benefits? Are there any drawbacks or shortfalls to apologetic blogging that people should keep in mind?

4. Personally, I see that the local church – and not just individuals – has been called to go and make disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28.18-20). With this in mind, how could local churches that are not currently leveraging blogs as a facet of ministry could benefit from having such an interactive presence on the web?

5. What have you found to be successful, and not so successful, in writing apologetic posts? Have you found that a particular style of writing is better received than others? What advice would you give a person in writing apologetic posts?

6. How do you and the team at Tblog go about connecting with a particular audience? Do you'll utilize any form of advertising or do you rely solely upon word-of-mouth or something in between?

7. In your opinion, do you see any present opportunities in Christian apologetic blogging?

8. Finally, where do you see apologetic blogging in ten years?

9. Steve, thanks a lot for taking the time to answer these questions. Finally, I have one last question, "Where can our readers find your work in Christian Fiction and Practical Theology?"

From: Steve Hays
To: Jesse Wisnewski

"When you said, 'Because blogging is an interactive medium, the agenda is, to some extent, set by what's out there.' What in particular do you and the team members at Tblog look to respond to?"

Well, it's inevitably selective, but it tends to cluster around certain issues like the inerrancy of Scripture, the canon of Scripture, atheism, Darwinism, hell, sola scriptura, the doctrine of God, comparative religion, miracles, the culture wars, the doctrines of grace, the problem of evil, the Resurrection, metaethics, bioethics, sexual ethics, philosophy of science, and counterterrorism,

"Are there particular blogs and/or attacks against Christianity that take more precedence than others?"

i) Blogs which are hostile to Christianity or Calvinism tend to be repetitious. So I deal with their stock objections to the faith, then move on to another blog–if it has something different to say.

ii) I tend to ignore what I consider to be lesser issues like one's view of the millennium.

iii) Some other issues, like justification by faith, are quite important in their own right, but I don't focus on them for a couple of reasons:

a) The issue is rather specialized, and there's already a lot of good literature on the subject. Some issues demand a book-length treatment. Blogging is not the best medium for that level of analysis.

b) It's often bound up with one's underlying view of authority. Does doctrine come from divine revelation (i.e. the Bible alone), or from the church? It's more efficient to deal with the underlying issue.

"Finally, are there particular trends that you have observed taking place that are of importance to address from an apologetic standpoint?"

Not really. There are passing fads, like the "new atheism," but we're generally dealing with variants of perennial issues.

"Before delving more into the apologetic realm, I found it interesting that you look to defend Calvinism in particular. What is it about Calvinism that you look to defend and why do you see this as an important issue?"

At a general level, truth is synonymous with reality. It's important, both for this life, and for the next, to adapt our beliefs and actions to reality, for reality isn't going to adapt itself to our misguided beliefs and actions. We don't define reality: reality defines us. When your beliefs and actions lose touch with reality, you can harm yourself and others. And the harm can either be for time or for eternity.

At a specific level, Calvinism is a theology of hope and thanksgiving. We believe that God has a plan for the world. That everything happens according to his plan. Even the evils we see and experience in this world are there as a means to a greater good. For a Calvinist, the whole world is God's world. Light and shade.

On the one hand, Calvinism is a theology of hope, for we seek, and expect to find, in this life or the next, the evident or hidden good in whatever God has purposed. That's the forward facet of Calvinism.

On the other hand, Calvinism is also a theology of thanksgiving, as we look back over our lives and begin to see and appreciate the wisdom and goodness of God's providence in the emerging pattern of events. That's the backward facet of Calvinism. They represent two different perspectives on our position in time–past and future.

If you can't trust God with your life, then what can you trust him with? If God is too untrustworthy to compose every day of your life, then why worship and obey him? Why go through the motions? If you can't trust God with your life, then he's hardly worthy of your worship or obedience.

For a Calvinist, every experience that God sends our way is a way to experience the goodness of God. A way to discover the wisdom of God. The greatness of God. We need to learn how to find the value in each experience that God has given us. For what makes our own life good and meaningful comes from sharing in his goodness.

Incidentally, you don't have to be a Calvinist to blog at Tblog. I'm simply describing my own point of view.

"Now, getting back to apologetics. What role do you see blogs playing in the field of apologetics?"

In our day and age, people increasingly get their information from the internet. It would be good if they read more books, but they don't, so you have to adapt to the culture, fill the void, and take advantage of that cyberspatial orientation.

"What would you consider to be the perceived benefits?"

i) On the one hand, you have seekers who are open to the Christian faith, but suffer from intellectual impediments of various sorts. They have an inaccurate grasp of Christian theology. Or they are impressed by plausible, but specious objections to the Christian faith. Apologetics can help to clear away those intellectual roadblocks.

ii) On the other hand, you have Christians who may suffer from intellectual doubts. Apologetics can help to answer their questions. Give them the reasons they need to achieve a confident faith.

Of course, the better part of wisdom lies in knowing which questions you can live without answering, and which questions you can't. Striking the right balance between faith and sight.

"Are there any drawbacks or shortfalls to apologetic blogging that people should keep in mind?"

In the nature of the case, apologetics is a polemical, combative discipline. It's also a fairly intellectual endeavor, which appeals to Christian intellectuals. As such, it can tempt an apologist to commit the sin of intellectual pride. There's a danger of substituting justification by truth for justification by faith. John Newton once said:

Self-righteousness can feed upon doctrines as well as upon works; and a man may have the heart of a Pharisee, while his head is stored with orthodox notions of the unworthiness of the creature and the riches of free grace...We find but very few writers of controversy who have not been manifestly hurt by it. Either they grow in a sense of their own importance, or imbibe an angry, contentious spirit, or they insensibly withdraw their attention from those things which are the food and immediate support of the life of faith, and spend their time and strength upon matters which are at most but of a secondary value.

I don't quite agree with him about "matters of secondary value." I think that Christian apologetics deals with matters of primary importance. At least it ought to. But the rest of what he said does draw attention to the spiritual hazards of a polemical orientation.

You need to have a life outside of apologetics. Your personal fulfillment must come from other sources and resources.

"Personally, I see that the local church – and not just individuals – has been called to go and make disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28.18-20). With this in mind, how could local churches that are not currently leveraging blogs as a facet of ministry could benefit from having such an interactive presence on the web?"

They can use their church website as an information clearing house by having a blogroll with links to various apologetic ministries.

"What have you found to be successful, and not so successful, in writing apologetic posts? Have you found that a particular style of writing is better received than others? What advice would you give a person in writing apologetic posts?"

i) Blogging is not like speaking before a live audience, where you can gauge the reaction of the audience. I know from the site meter that most of our audience consists of lurkers who rarely comment on a post. But if it gets a lot of traffic, like we do, then it's clearly reaching many people, who presumably benefit from what we post–otherwise they wouldn't tune in on a regular basis.

ii) Your style depends, in part, on your personality and literary ability. It's good to be memorable. To use catchy phrases and striking illustrations.

iii) Then there's the question of how to deal with hostile opponents. I think it's a mistake to spend a lot of time defending yourself against personal aspersions. You shouldn't make yourself the center of attention.

iii) In general, it might be best to write in a detached, dispassionate, business-like style. That lessens the potential for hurt feelings.

On the other hand, many folks don't hold to false beliefs merely through ignorance of the truth. There's often a willful, defiant quality to their beliefs. In that case I think it's appropriate to point out that their belief is irrational or even sinful.

People don't like being told that, but there is a moral dimension to what we believe. We are answerable to God for what we believe about him, and how we live accordingly. What we believe about him should align with what he's told us about himself.

"How do you and the team at Tblog go about connecting with a particular audience? Do you'll utilize any form of advertising or do you rely solely upon word-of-mouth or something in between?"

By word-of-mouth. For better or worse, blogs tend to self-select for a like-minded audience.

"In your opinion, do you see any present opportunities in Christian apologetic blogging?"

It's a way of reaching the unreached. Making the Christian faith readily available outside the four walls of the church.

"Finally, where do you see apologetic blogging in ten years?"

There's a lot of younger talent in the pipeline. Hopefully, apologetic blogging will improve as more professionals take advantage of this medium.

"Steve, thanks a lot for taking the time to answer these questions. Finally, I have one last question, 'Where can our readers find your work in Christian Fiction and Practical Theology?'"

Some of these posts have been labeled, if you click on the "Fiction" or "Practical Theology" link. Unfortunately, not all such posts have been labeled.

[For those interested in but unfamiliar with apologetical resources from Steve, "Why I Believe: A Positive Apologetic" and "Why I Believe: I'm Glad You Asked!" serve as excellent starting points. Love the Lord with Heart and Mind contains an interview with Steve on the topic of apologetics as well.]